Not the First Digit! Using Benford's Law to Detect Fraudulent Scientif ic Data

207 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud (2012, background): “The expected last-digit frequencies for four-digit Benford distributed numbers are nearly uniform and range from .09982 to .10018 (Diekmann 2007, table 1).”
Fact and Fiction in EU-Governmental Economic Data (2011, methodology): “In addition, data from scientific publications have been checked for conformity with Benford’s law in Diekmann (2007), Günnel and Tödter (2009) and Tödter (2009).”
Leader Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations: Strategies for Sensemaking (2012, background): “Making predictions, however, is difficult and many predictions can be inaccurate, leading to overly punitive evaluations of others or overly optimistic evaluations regarding outcomes affecting one’s self (Diekmann 2007).”
The Quality of China's GDP Statistics (2014, unknown): “…psychological product pricing (el Sehity et al., 2005), price manipulations in ebaY auctions (Giles, 2007), in-kind campaign donations (Cho and Gaines, 2007), fraud in scientific data (Diekmann, 2007), the quality of survey data (Judge and Schechter, 2009), and election fraud (Deckert et al, 2011).”